Alito: `A judge can't have any agenda'

No one is above or below the law, nominee says in opening remarks

January 10, 2006|By Jan Crawford Greenburg, Washington Bureau

WASHINGTON — Pledging "to do equal right to the poor and the rich," Judge Samuel Alito said Monday that if confirmed to the Supreme Court he would respect the rule of law and "administer justice without regard" to a person's standing in life.

In a deeply personal statement on the first day of hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Alito talked of the important experiences in his life, from his immigrant parents' struggles to get an education and employment to his own career as a government lawyer and federal appeals court judge.

"No person in this country, no matter how high or powerful, is above the law, and no person in this country is beneath the law," Alito said in a stirring 11-minute statement at the end of the first day of his confirmation hearings to replace retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor.

In his 15 years on the Philadelphia-based federal appeals court, Alito said he learned "the way in which a judge should go about the work of judging." It was a "big change in role" for him, he said, after working as a lawyer in the Reagan administration and as a federal prosecutor in New Jersey, where he always sought to get his clients' desired results.

"A judge can't have any agenda. A judge can't have any preferred outcome in any particular case," said Alito, with his wife, Martha, two teenage children and other family members sitting behind him. "The judge's only obligation--and it's a solemn obligation--is to the rule of law."

Alito's remarks came after Republican and Democratic senators staked out their positions and sought to define the nominee on their own terms. Recent polls have indicated that three-quarters of the American public either do not know of Alito or have no opinion of him.

In the opening statements, Republicans presented Alito, 55, as a careful and restrained judge who would faithfully apply the law, emphasizing his modest upbringing that took him to the Ivy League and top jobs in government service. They accused Democrats of playing politics with the nomination.

"If fairness, integrity, qualifications, an open mind were all that mattered in this process, you would be confirmed unanimously," said Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas). "But we know that's not how the process works."

Democrats, on the other hand, portrayed Alito as a conservative ideologue who has been too deferential to presidential power and who, if confirmed, would scale back women's rights and civil rights. They said he carried a particularly high burden going into the hearings because he would replace the moderate O'Connor, who has provided the critical fifth vote with liberals to affirm the right to an abortion, favor the use of affirmative action and maintain the separation of church and state in government affairs.

"This vacancy is going to tip the scales of justice on the Supreme Court one way or another," said Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) "The Supreme Court is the last refuge in America for our rights and liberties."

A lengthy paper trail

In the battle over the nomination, both sides have much to work with. Alito has written more than 350 opinions during his tenure on the federal appeals court. Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) said those opinions could make him seem like a "flaming liberal or an archconservative" if read selectively.

Senate Democrats also said Alito will be pressed to explain several documents from his time as a lawyer in the Reagan administration, especially two 1985 memos that implied his personal opposition to the landmark Roe vs. Wade decision guaranteeing a woman's right to an abortion nationwide.

In those memos, Alito criticized Roe and suggested a legal strategy for chipping away at its protections. But he has since suggested that he took that position as an advocate, advancing the position of the Reagan administration. His current views on the case are unknown and, like previous nominees, he is not expected to discuss whether he would vote to overturn Roe or whether he considers it settled law of the land.

"You have an obligation to answer questions on topics you have written about," Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) told Alito. "On the question of choice, for example, you have already given the suggestion of prejudgment on a question that will likely come before the court. You cannot use that as a basis for not answering."

Monday's hearing had a distinctly political cast, with Democrats focusing on issues now in the headlines, including the broad scope of executive power that President Bush has asserted in fighting the war on terrorism. That issue, along with the question of whether Alito would vote to overturn Roe, is likely to dominate the questioning that begins Tuesday morning.